This is going to sound a little weird, but I was reading Stack Overflow's blog policy about big rep users' ability to edit other users' posts.
One of my posts recently underwent a bad edit from another user (that made me question if English was even their first language?), and went to investigate that user, and saw a pattern of "micro" editing.
What I mean by micro editing is that overall, the post/question is perfectly fine, comprehensible, and readable, but minor changes - like a few spellings, contractions, or encodings with back-ticks were made. (Like a micro-manager, they focus on a tiny thing instead of the overall big picture).
I don't mind seeing (or having my) questions back-ticked because I was a beginner and couldn't figure out how (or that it existed at all). But, I am kind of queasy about seeing the big 'EDITED BY' stamped on a post (I think, uhoh, I/they must have royally f***ed up the question!) and then seeing the revisions: two misspellings corrected.
So my question is:
What is the policy on micro-editing? Is it really okay?
I'm not questioning at all the cases where a dedicated user edits a poorly formatted question to put in links or quotes or puts code in, or in some manner greatly improves the readability and comprehensability (is that a word?) of a question. I mean instead, the cases where, for example, the post was edited soley to insert an apostrophe in a 'youre', or something completely trivial.